43 replies to this topic

[advancedatheist]

I also must fake sociability in bridal consultations.  Luckily there are many "scripts" I've either adapted or invented over the years, including body language. 

You can probably understand how I feel when a female potential guest over the phone asks if the Creekside cabins are "romantic." Hell, I don't know what they mean by that.

[Anne]

My only problem is when I have to talk to the wives.  Most of them have no interest in Star Wars. 

Bwaha! Sounds like my main complaint about my classmates in elementary school. We had these little autograph books in 5th grade (everyone in the class had to sign everyone else's) and something like three or four people wrote in mine:

"Dear Anne,

I hope you get over Star Wars and start to like New Kids On The Block".

I think that pretty much speaks for itself. Overall I find that online communication (or at least, meeting people online initially) is the only way I can really end up in reasonable discussions. On the Internets, people pre-sort themselves according to their interests. I remember being totally shocked and amazed that some people didn't have any "obsessions" or very strong interests, or that they could have people as friends that they didn't share any common interests with. It still boggles my mind. But to each their own, I guess.

And advancedatheist: I still have no effing clue what "romantic" is supposed to mean. I mean, I know what the cultural symbols of romance are (flowers, hearts, etc.) but those things have about as much internal significance for me as a platypus. And a platypus is probably a lot more interesting.

I also have no idea AT ALL how anyone could describe a *room* as romantic. Maybe "no cockroaches?"

[kylyssa]

Due to my job I define things like romantic on an almost daily basis. I look up all the buzzwords relevant to my pursuit and lodge their definitions in my mind. I do this by (gag) skimming through the latest bridal magazines to catch the patterns of new "in" phrases used to entice brides to spend money.

[kylyssa]

I remember being totally shocked and amazed that some people didn't have any "obsessions" or very strong interests, or that they could have people as friends that they didn't share any common interests with.  It still boggles my mind.

People even marry people they don't have common interests with! I can't relate to a lack of obsessions. I work with a lot of people who have no real interests - what do they do with themselves, anyway? Most have told me they talk to friends, spend time with people, and watch television. Maybe that's why they have no interest in living forever?

[Anne]

GAH! The vaccine hypothesis is the biggest pile of horse-puckey I've ever encountered. Or at least one of them. It's pseudoscience, fueled by ignorance of biology and chemistry. Autism exists in unvaccinated people. Not everyone who is vaccinated ends up being autistic. The symptoms of mercury poisoning (bleeding gums, gastrointestinal upset, kidney damage, etc.) are absolutely nothing like the manifestations of autism.

Autism also often results in development that, though atypical, includes notable cognitive strengths such as the ability to receive sensory data on a more "raw", detail-oriented level (which results in things like superior performance on embedded-figure tests in cognitive testing) and diminished susceptibility to false memory recall. You don't get cognitive strengths as a result of mercury poisoning (not that I'm denying the real difficulties that some autistic people experience -- but certainly, the entire human species is fraught with difficulty).

If you want links, I can get links. I've reviewed the various hypotheses extensively and I'm extremely suspicious of the integrity of people like, say, David Kirby and VERY suspicious of people like the Geiers (quacks who think that autism can be treated by giving chemical castration drugs to children).

I'm interested in talking about advocacy and neurodiversity in addition to life extension and I'm trying to optimize my time, so I certainly don't plan on getting into a massive discussion here on the mercury debate. Suffice to say that I've read a lot and reviewed the available research and methodology and the mercury hypothesis is absolutely non-convincing to me. The whole idea smacks of a conspiracy-theory both perpetuated by and fueled by frightened parents who want someone to blame because their kid didn't turn out exactly the way they wanted him/her to. There is a very strong familial component to autism and my theory on the increased prevalence in recent years is related to

(a) broadened diagnostic categories -- inclusion of such things as Asperger's in the DSM-IV in 1994, for instance,

(b) inclusion of autism as a special-education category (meaning more parents seek a diagnosis in the first place so their child can get extra help in school), and

© assortative mating, especially in tech-heavy areas (not to mention the fact that the Internet and computing has enabled people who would never be likely to meet someone in public or in a bar to find like-minded mates).

That's the last I'll say on the mercury matter, though -- there's reams and reams of huge comment-thread arguments on the Web as well as plenty of scientific data. It's out there for anyone who wants to research it but I do not have the bandwith or the inclination to repeat all the science here in this forum. If you want to believe people are poisoned because they have a strong interest in a particular subject and don't socialize or develop in a typical manner, then that's fine, but I'd instead urge you to consider alternate explanations.

[Anne]

Your son is probably doing much better because all children grow and develop. Autism isn't developmental stasis. Please keep this in mind.

[treonsverdery]

geocities.com/treonbarleyverdery/index.html

Edited by treonsverdery, 01 November 2006 - 01:57 AM.

[Anne]

????????????????????????????????????

Heh, wonder, it looks like we agree on one thing.

I think we might have a troll/spammer in our midst.

[treonsverdery]

geocities.com/treonbarleyverdery/index.html

Edited by treonsverdery, 01 November 2006 - 01:56 AM.

[treonsverdery]

geocities.com/treonbarleyverdery/index.html

Edited by treonsverdery, 01 November 2006 - 01:56 AM.